The Nitrate Elimination Co., Inc.  (NECi) -- Lake Linden MI 49945

Home    Catalog    Products    NECi News    Ordering
Nitrate & Your Health      Nitrate FAQ     NECi R&D     About NECi
 

Nitrate in the News

Nitrate News -- January, 2000

Low nitrate levels fatal to frogs (WaterNet 1/7/00) CORVALLIS, OR — Nitrate levels below the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) maximum contaminant level (MCL) for drinking water can kill frogs and toads, according to a new study. Oregon State University researchers found some tadpoles and frogs raised in water with less than 7 milligrams per liter (mg/L) of nitrate, lower levels than those found in many US water sources exposed to fertilizer runoff, ate less, developed physical abnormalities and eventually died. None died in control tanks of water free of nitrate, according to the Associated Press. The EPA MCL is 10 mg/L. Zoology professor Andrew Blaustein said researchers weren't expecting to see a reaction from levels this low. He added that the study results indicate a significant problem with possible implications for human health. EPA officials said they could not comment until they have reviewed the study, which appeared in the December issue of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. Scientists around the world have reported a sharp, unexplained decline in populations of frogs and other amphibians. Water pollution and depletion of the ozone layer are among the factors that have been blamed for the phenomenon.

FERTILIZER LETHAL TO AMPHIBIANS: (GREENLines Email Service, 7Jan00) Even very low levels of fertilizers, that the EPA finds "safe for human drinking water," can be deadly to "some protected and endangered amphibians," reports AP 1/6. The fertilizers have a dual affect of killing the frogs and toads directly or indirectly by fostering algal growth beneficial to "parasitic flatworms called trematodes" which are known to cause deformities. The Oregon State study found that amphibians were adversely affected by nitrite levels "well below those that the EPA considers safe for warm water fish." Nitrite levels can be concentrated in shoreline areas containing lots of organic matter or subject to runoff from livestock manure. (Note from Bill Campbell, Editor of Nitrate in the News – I think the problem for the frogs is nitrate and not nitrite as stated in this report.  See the actual report from AP below as it appeared on the New York Times web site.  Nitrite is highly toxic to all animals and does not generally accumulate in the environment.  Also see the Newsrelease from Oregon State Univ. following the NY Times/AP report).

Fertilizer Reported Deadly To Frogs (New York Times, January 6, 2000, By The Associated Press) CORVALLIS, Ore. (AP) -- Fertilizer levels the Environmental Protection Agency says are safe for human drinking water can kill some species of frogs and toads, according to a new study.  Oregon State University researchers found some tadpoles and young frogs raised in water with low levels of nitrates typical of fertilizer runoff ate less, developed physical abnormalities, suffered paralysis and eventually died. In control tanks with normal water, none died.  ``We're looking at levels of nitrates so low we didn't think we'd get any effect,'' said Andrew Blaustein, a zoology professor.  In addition, the fertilizer runoff may be encouraging the growth of algae that feeds tiny parasitic flatworms called trematodes, blamed for causing deformities in frogs around the United States.  The study indicates EPA water quality criteria does not guarantee the survival of some protected and endangered amphibians, Blaustein said.  ``I think this is clearly a significant problem,'' he said. ``The question I have to ask is, are you comfortable drinking water with levels of fertilizer that kills off frogs?''  Officials at the Environmental Protection Agency regional office in Seattle said they could not comment until they have reviewed the study, published last month in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.  Scientists internationally have reported a sharp decline in the numbers of frogs, toads and salamanders in many locations. Numerous explanations have been proposed, including water pollution and increased ultraviolet radiation from the sun because of a thinning ozone layer around the Earth.

Fertilizers may be linked to amphibian deaths   (Oregon State Univ. Newsrelease, 01-05-00  By David Stauth, 541-737-0787 SOURCE: Andrew Blaustein, 541-737-5356)  CORVALLIS, Ore. - Researchers have discovered that a level of nitrogen-based compounds which the EPA says is safe for human drinking water - a level often found in agricultural areas as a result of using crop fertilizers - is enough to kill some species of amphibians.   A new study at Oregon State University, just published in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, has shown that several frog, toad and other amphibian species, especially at their more vulnerable larval stages, can be highly susceptible to fairly low levels of nitrate and nitrite exposure.   When exposed to moderate amounts of nitrates and nitrites, some tadpoles and young frogs reduced their feeding activity, swam less vigorously, experienced disequilibrium, developed physical abnormalities, suffered paralysis and eventually died. In control tanks with normal water, none died.   "I think this is clearly a significant problem," said Andrew Blaustein, a professor of zoology at OSU and expert on global amphibian declines. "Right here in the Pacific Northwest we're having localized extinctions of some amphibians and widespread declines in others. We now have clear evidence that nitrate and nitrite exposure at levels considered safe for humans or fish is enough to kill amphibians."   Blaustein has done pioneering research on the potential impact of UV-B radiation in sunlight as one possible cause of amphibian problems. He now says that exposure to nitrogen fertilizers - along with habitat destruction, climate change, pollution, pathogens and introduced predators - is probably another part of the answer to an international mystery that has alarmed ecologists around the world.   But this latest part of the puzzle goes to the heart of crop agricultural practices, he said, which depend heavily on the use of artificial fertilizers rich in nitrogen to produce the world's food supply.   In their study, the OSU scientists worked with five species of amphibians, including the Oregon spotted frog, red-legged frog, western toad, Pacific treefrog and northwestern salamander. In the past 40 years, the Oregon spotted frog has largely disappear ed from most of its known historical range - an area of lowlands with intensive agricultural use.   The scientists tested the sensitivity of the amphibians to environmental levels of nitrates and nitrites. The Oregon spotted frog was the most sensitive - three to four times more vulnerable to nitrates and nitrites than red-legged frogs and Pacific tree frogs. Not by coincidence, the scientists believe, the more-sensitive spotted frog is the species that has almost totally disappeared from these areas.   Levels of nitrites considered safe for human drinking water killed over half of the Oregon spotted frog tadpoles after 15 days of exposure. All five species showed a similar level of mortality at levels of nitrites that were higher, but still well below t hose that the EPA considers safe for warm water fishes.   Nitrates themselves are of low toxicity, the study pointed out, but they cause health problems when reduced to nitrites. Nitrite levels can become higher in specific areas such as shore sites with high contents of organic matter, and also be concentrated by ranch animal manures. And nitrate can be reduced to nitrite in the gastrointestinal tract - especially in younger animals.   The study results indicate that water quality criteria set up by the EPA does not guarantee the survival of some protected and endangered amphibians, the authors said in their report.   According to Blaustein, health effects such as those caused by nitrates and nitrites may also work in concert with other environmental insults, such as acid rain or UV-B exposure, to compound problems.   "Many people are looking for the one single thing that is causing all these amphibian declines, but in reality it's almost certainly a combination of causes," Blaustein said. "It's clear there can be a synergistic effect that causes higher mortality when you have different problems all occurring at once."   For instance, Blaustein said the furor that has arisen over frog deformities such as extra legs has been linked to a trematode parasite known as a fluke.   "But it's probably not that simple," he said. "These flukes have been around forever and we never observed the level of problem we're now seeing with deformed frogs. It's quite possible this fertilizer issue relates to that, along with killing tadpoles directly."   The flukes that can cause amphibian deformities live part of their life cycle in a snail, Blaustein said. Snails eat algae. And higher levels of nitrogen-based fertilizers can cause increased algal growth, increasing the snail populations.   "At one pond near Corvallis, we found 67 percent of the frogs had multiple legs," Blaustein said. "And this was in a wildlife management area, which was not intensively farmed but was only surrounded by agricultural lands."   Measurements of water there showed highly elevated levels of nitrate - up to 11 milligrams per liter - which is just above the EPA legal level for drinking water.   The researchers stated in their report that chemicals used for various purposes, including crop agriculture, may permeate lakes, ponds and streams, making them unsuitable for many amphibians.   One of the amphibian species that appears to be the least vulnerable to nitrates, they said, is bullfrogs - an introduced and voracious predator that in turn preys on other amphibian species and is tending to displace them in many agricultural areas.   "As we look for the cause of declining amphibians, we're going to find a lot of these types of interactions," Blaustein said. "But the fact remains that nitrogen fertilizers by themselves, used at levels considered safe in drinking water, are enough to kill some amphibians. So clearly that's part of the answer and a fairly serious concern in its own right. And it's pretty good evidence that we need to think again about the level of these nitrate compounds that we say is safe."

Southern California planning for future water needs (Environmental News Network, Friday, January 7, 2000  By John H. Orr, The Business Press, Ontario, Calif.)  All the technological and economic promise of the 21st century can't alter one fact: Southern California is a desert, and without water, the region's growth engine chugs to a halt.  Water from the Owens Valley sustained the first urban wave in Los Angeles. The Colorado River propelled the postwar boom. But where will the water come from to fuel the Inland Empire's growth in the '00s and beyond?  Experts agree: Within 30 years, demand will outstrip known water supplies by as much as 2-to-1, according to the Metropolitan Water District.  "The 30-year prospects hang on our being able to retain our allocations from the State Water Project and Colorado River, and doing all we can to desalinate, recycle and improve the quality of our local resources," said Adan Ortega, the Metropolitan general manager's executive assistant for external affairs.  "We have an edge right now: We have a little time to plan," he said. "The region as a whole has been in a pretty intensive planning period, trying to figure out how to meet that demand."  In the next five years, the region will expand and improve its ground water supplies with projects spurred by the 1992 drought and designed to ensure stable supplies.  "People avoid doing the difficult thing until there's a drought," said Joe Grindstaff, general manager of the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority. The authority represents five water districts that provide water to 4.8 million residents in areas of Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange and Los Angeles counties.  "We think that population will grow to 7 million in 20 years, and we're going to have to serve them," Grindstaff said. "Our challenge is to figure out how to do that."  While Southern California's municipal, industrial and agricultural water demand is projected to reach 4.1 million acre-feet a year by 2030, only 2 million acre-feet will be available from ground water, the Los Angeles Aqueduct and existing and potential water reclamation, according to Metropolitan.  "There will be even more challenges, not for the urban population so much — they'll be taken care of — but for the agricultural industry, which consumes 85 percent of the water supply," Grindstaff said.  As 21st century growth drives up the value of water and land, agriculture will be increasingly driven out of the region, he said.  The strategy is to treat and store rain and runoff, Santa Ana River water and imported supplies so local communities need not rely on water piped in from Northern California or the Colorado River.  "The days of building aqueducts to solve our problems are gone," Ortega said. "The next answers will have to do with technology."  On the March 7 ballot, California voters will consider Proposition 13, a $1.97 billion water construction bond that, if passed, would provide $187 million for the Inland Empire.  The bond would supplement the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority's $2 billion, 20-year project to create 1.3 million acre-feet of underground water storage — enough for a three-year supply — mostly in the Chino Basin, but also in aquifers throughout the Inland Empire.  The first Chino Basin desalter, under construction since September 1998, is scheduled to begin operations this month. More desalters will be added as financing permits.  The project, which includes water treatment and wildlife conservation, will coincide with federal work to prevent flooding along the Santa Ana River.  About $1.3 billion of the project will be paid by water agencies through increased rates. Average water bills will go up 15 percent to 20 percent over the life of the plan.  If the bond fails, "some of the projects would take many more years to go forward," Grindstaff said. "But they all will be built eventually."  The future will see better use and recovery of local water supplies, transfers from farm to urban use, more efficient collection and distribution of Northern California rainwater and snow melt, and desalination of ocean water, he said.  New technology has reduced the price of desalting sea water from $2,000 to $1,000 an acre-foot, Grindstaff said, making it competitive with imported supplies.  "I think you'll see the Salton Sea take a bigger role," he said.  Eastside Reservoir In March, Metropolitan will open the Eastside Reservoir, a $2.1 billion project in the Domenigoni Valley that will nearly double the district's drinking water supply.  With a capacity of 800,000 acre-feet, the reservoir is designed to provide 16 million customers with a six-month supply of water accumulated from the Colorado River Aqueduct and Lake Silverwood over the next four years.  The reservoir will spur recreational activities as well as retail and food services along Highway 79 south of Hemet. A draft development plan is due from Metropolitan this month. In another effort, Metropolitan is creating an aquifer in Hayfield Valley, about 50 miles from Palm Springs, to store water from the Colorado River Aqueduct. Officials hope to store 100,000 acre-feet by this summer.  Copyright 2000, The Business Press, Ontario, Calif. Knight Ridder/Tribune, All Rights Reserved

EPA to order National Guard to clean up firing ranges on Cape Cod base (Environmental News Network, Friday, January 7, 2000, By Scott Allen, The Boston Globe) Faced with mounting evidence that old artillery shells and other munitions may be polluting Cape Cod's drinking water, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today will order the National Guard to clean up its firing ranges at Massachusetts Military Reservation, a massive job that could cost $320 million.  The order, the first time that EPA has required the cleanup of a military firing range, puts Cape Cod at the center of a national debate over the environmental safety of all the bullets and bombs left behind by military training. A lawyer from Puerto Rico is traveling to Boston next week to see whether the EPA strategy could be used to block Navy bombing exercises there.  EPA officials already have halted the use of most explosives at the Cape Cod reservation, and Governor Paul Cellucci wants to turn the training grounds into a wildlife preserve. But yesterday EPA officials said decades of military training have left toxic fingerprints that first must be erased.  "We must act now to clean up the contamination and prevent any further damage to the water supply," said EPA regional administrator John P. DeVillars, adding, "I hope this will serve to advance not only the protection of Cape Cod's water supply, but also greater attention and energy at other sites across the country."  National Guard officials expressed disappointment in the order, saying they already planned strong steps to remove unexploded shells and decontaminate soil. They said the order will only raise the cost of the cleanup by forcing the Guard to bring in more personnel rather than relying on staff already at the base cleaning up other contaminated sites.  "I don't think it makes sense. We'll have one guy on one side of the fence and another guy on the other side of the fence looking at the same piece of ground," said Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Knott of the National Guard Bureau, the Pentagon agency that oversees state National Guards.  But activists who have been battling the Guard and other military agencies over contamination at the reservation for years cheered DeVillars's order, saying EPA's tough stance has prompted the military to take the problems there seriously.  "It's just been fantastic. That's all I can say," said activist Joel Feigenbaum of Sandwich, who once criticized the EPA for not taking enough interest in the reservation. "By and large, the cleanup is a model for the whole country."  The 22,000-acre Massachusetts Military Reservation, which includes the Guard's main New England training ground at Camp Edwards, could hardly have been located in a more fragile environment. It sits directly atop a vast ground water system that indirectly supplies water for 200,000 year-round residents and 500,000 people in the summer.  Other activities at the Bourne base, such as jet fueling and chemical spills, have contaminated millions of gallons of ground water, landing the reservation on the federal Superfund list of hazardous waste sites.  But it was only three years ago that Cape Cod residents began to worry about the threat from the ongoing training at Camp Edwards. Since 1911, soldiers have fired guns, artillery, mortars and other weapons, and once buried unexploded ordnance, perhaps depositing explosive ingredients such as RDX, which is as toxic as rat poison, in ground water.  Over the strong objections of the Department of Defense, which oversees the National Guard, DeVillars ordered a stop to most shooting at Camp Edwards in April 1997 with a few exceptions such as firing plastic bullets. He said the ceasefire would be lifted only if studies showed the training was environmentally safe.  Yesterday, DeVillars said preliminary results show that the military training is anything but safe. Elevated levels of toxic RDX have been found in 18 monitoring wells, including one where concentrations were 185 times the EPA's safe level. The Guard found metals in 40 wells and pesticides in another 31 wells.  In addition, Guard officials found dozens of unexploded live ordnance and 1,000 mortar rounds, most of them dummies, in the course of installing the wells around 14,000-acre Camp Edwards.  The National Guard Bureau's Knott said he was concerned about the contamination too, lining up contractors to decontaminate soil this year and estimating that it could cost $320 million to remove the unexploded ordnance and treat the soil and water.  However, the Guard asked EPA not to issue an order, but to incorporate the firing range cleanup into the base's broader Superfund cleanup under the supervision of the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence.  Instead, EPA used its extraordinary power under the Safe Drinking Water Act to protect public water supplies, issuing a detailed schedule of cleanup activities the Guard must carry out, including the cleanup of soil in six areas by October.  "This is definitely premature," said Knott, saying that the EPA is issuing the order before the ground water studies are finished to coincide with DeVillars's last day as regional administrator.  But Feigenbaum said the Defense Department is upset mainly because of the precedent the EPA order could set for firing ranges across the country. The EPA estimates that the military uses 24 million acres in the United States for firing ranges. Perhaps 20 to 25 of the ranges are located on sole-source aquifers just like Massachusetts Military Reservation.  In fact, Feigenbaum is fanning the flames. He traveled to Vieques, Puerto Rico, last month where activists including pop singer Ricky Martin have been fighting a Navy training ground. He told activists there the Safe Drinking Water Act might help them as well, prompting a lawyer from the island's powerful Independence Party to plan a trip to Boston to learn more.  Military officials can expect little sympathy from EPA Administrator Carol Browner, to whom they have twice unsuccessfully appealed to overturn DeVillars's orders on the Camp Edwards firing ranges.  "Today's landmark action will mean the improved protection of public health and the environment for Cape Cod as that community enters the 21st century," she said.  Copyright 2000, The Boston Globe Knight Ridder/Tribune, All Rights Reserved

Researchers seek answers to combat world's stressed freshwater supply (The American Geophysical Union, Press Release, 15Dec99) Contact: Kenneth Strzepek,  strzepek@boulder.colorado.edu, 303-886-7230, University of Colorado at Boulder. A multi-pronged analysis of global water resources indicates the supply of clean freshwater for use by humans and natural ecosystems is shrinking by the year, according to a University of Colorado at Boulder researcher.  Associate Professor Kenneth Strzepek of the civil, architectural and environmental engineering department said the analysis indicates one-third of the world’s population is currently living in regions that are classified as "water stressed." And, as the human population grows, more water will be needed for irrigation, livestock, industry and to sustain natural ecosystems.  "It is estimated under a 'business as usual' scenario that by the year 2025, almost one-half of the population will be living in water-stressed regions," he said.  Strzepek and his colleagues have used sophisticated computer models and geographical information systems to look at river basins around the world and identify those that are the most stressed. Some of the "hot spots" include China’s Yellow River basin, Africa’s Zambeze River basin, the Syr Darya and Amu Darya River basins leading to Russia’s Aral Sea and the Colorado River basin.  His research is part of a background analysis for the World Water Commission’s "World Water Vision for the 21st Century" report. The commission is a government and privately funded organization seeking global solutions to water problems.  He said socioeconomics, geography, politics and the environment all need to be factored in to develop sound policy decisions. "We are using a broad-brush approach here, but major water-policy decisions require analysis and input from a wide number of disciplines." Strzepek gave an invited talk on the subject at the annual fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union held Dec. 13 to Dec. 17 in San Francisco. He has been working on the project with CU graduates Alyssa Holt of the Stockholm Environmental Institute and Jeff Bandy of the University of Leuven in Belgium.  The modeling tools have allowed Strzepek and his colleagues to look at the vegetation, soils and climate from the headwaters to the mouths of the world’s major river systems in 25 mile-square chunks to model runoff and streamflow. They also have been able to use past temperature and precipitation data to reconstruct runoff and streamflow data for major river basins going back 100 years.  While reservoirs have long been used to change the distribution of river flows, evaporation can result in losses up to 25 percent of a river’s annual flow in arid and semi-arid years. Today, 70 percent of the world’s freshwater withdrawn by humans is used to irrigate crops, he said.  Unfortunately, much of the irrigation water takes up pesticides, herbicides and salts from cropland soil and returns to the river system, polluting the water and adversely affecting humans and the environment.  "In the Nile Delta in Egypt, water quality is a major problem for human and agricultural use due to upstream pollution from agricultural, industrial and municipal uses," Strzepek said. "Similar situations are found in other river systems like the Indus River in Pakistan and the Yellow River in China."  A sustainable water supply is determined by the nature of a river basin’s hydrology and storage capacity. While more dams provide more water for humans, they cause environmental impacts, he said. Researchers factoring in some knowledge of aquatic ecosystems have set a goal that no more than 40 percent of a river basin’s water should be diverted for human use in order for the environment to be adequately protected, he said.  "In the Colorado River basin, however, 100 percent of the water is used," Strzepek said. While the average flow in the basin is 15 million acre-feet per year, only 1.5 million acre feet is delivered annually to Mexico and only a trickle remains as the Colorado River enters the Gulf of California in Mexico.  Strzepek said that developing sustainable water policy requires experts to gain input from "stakeholders" in the river basins regarding their own cultural and social values on sustainability. "In developing countries, especially in arid and semi-arid regions, this means involving women more in the water-management decision process. They are the primary water-gatherers and often bear the heaviest load in agricultural labor," he said.  "The goal of the World Water Commission is to make water everybody’s business in the 21st century and to see that the needs of nature and humans are met as we pursue the task of sustainable economic growth," Strzepek said.

White House seeks more spending for farm plan (The Nando Times, 7Jan2000, Copyright © 2000 Nando Media  Copyright © 2000 Aponline) WASHINGTON (January 7, 2000 7:52 p.m. EST http://www.nandotimes.com) - The Clinton administration proposed Friday to almost double federal spending on farm conservation programs, both to help farmers cope with depressed commodity prices and to reduce runoff that pollutes many of the nation's rivers.   The president's 2001 budget would authorize $1.3 billion in new agricultural conservation spending, including $600 million in payments to farmers who voluntarily act to prevent erosion on their land. It also would expand the popular Conservation Reserve Program, which pays producers to take environmentally sensitive acreage out of production.   "We have been paying farmers for decades to grow commodities and, in some cases, not to grow commodities. Now we must start thinking of the land itself as our most valuable commodity," said Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman.   The Agriculture Department predicts that net farm income will drop $7.6 billion this year to $40.4 billion unless Congress steps in this fall with another large infusion of federal aid. Lawmakers have done that the last two years, and the administration hopes to steer at least some of the money this year into conservation programs.   The 2001 budget also is expected to include some form of payments to be tied to decreases in crop prices or farm income but the details have not been finalized, officials said. The 2001 fiscal year begins Oct. 1.   The centerpiece of the administration's conservation plan is the new $600 million subsidy program, introduced in Congress last year by Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa.   Payment levels under the "Conservation Security Program" would be based on the scope of farmers' conservation measures. They could include planting grass along streams and cutting back on livestock grazing.   An existing program that provides assistance for manure control and a variety of other conservation measures would be increased from $174 million this year to $325 million in 2001.   Other proposals include:     Increasing the acreage cap in the Conservation Reserve Program from 36 million to 40 million acres. That would allow more than twice as much land to be enrolled in the program during the 2001 fiscal year as would be permitted under current law. It is by far USDA's biggest existing conservation program at $1.3 billion - about $5,000 per farm.     Expanding a program that pays farmers to restore wetlands by 210,000 acres in 2001 and an additional 250,000 acres a year after that. The Wetlands Reserve Program is currently limited to 975,000 acres.   Vice President Al Gore announced the conservation moves in a conference call with reporters in Iowa, which is holding its presidential nominating caucuses later this month. Gore said the proposals would provide a "new source of welcome income for farmers."   They also would soften the blow of tougher environmental regulations that the administration is considering.   The Environmental Protection Agency proposed last summer to require states to submit plans to clean up every waterway that fails to meet water quality standards. The administration is considering other measures to curb farm runoff believed responsible for an oxygen-deprived "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico.   The administration's plan "recognizes that we must put more money into the hands of landowners if we're going to clean up the nation's remaining polluted rivers," said Scott Faber of American Rivers, a conservation group. "There is simply no way politically or logistically that we can regulate every landowner in America."   Farm-state lawmakers may not be as receptive to the plan. The proposals would provide little immediate relief to farmers, and they would have to spend some of their own money on conservation to qualify for the aid.   Grain prices collapsed in 1998 and Congress has provided farmers with $15 billion in consecutive bailouts over the past two years.

Reactive nitrogen at root of land’s waste, group says (Environmental News Network, Wednesday, January 12, 2000, By John Roach) Chemically altered nitrogen molecules, commonly known as "reactive nitrogen," are the root of modern-day environmental degradation, the Intermountain Water Alliance says.  "It was the limited availability of reactive nitrogen ... that established the earth's biodiversity and ecosystem as we know it and like it," note Peter Maier and Kay Henry of the alliance.  Yet, reactive nitrogen became widely available after German chemist Fritz Haber developed a method to synthesize ammonia, for which he received the Nobel Prize in 1919. Haber's discovery led to the industrial production of fertilizer, an abundant form of reactive nitrogen.  "Fertilizer is the fuel of the modern food production system," said Ron Phillips, a spokesman for the Fertilizer Institute in Washington, D.C. "It has enabled farmers to provide the most bountiful food supply in the history of mankind."  Reactive nitrogen, which supplies food with nutrients, is responsible not only for the population boom of the last 100 years but also for the longevity of the world's population.  "The explosive growth of the world population, from one and a half billion by the start of the century to more than six by the end of this century, was only possible because of Haber's invention," Maier and Henry write. "Although clearly a blessing for humans, the impact of this massive introduction of 'reactive nitrogen' on the Earth's ecosystem was unforeseen."  Before Haber's invention, a limited amount of reactive nitrogen passed along the food chain, keeping the biodiversity of Earth's ecosystems in check.  Haber's invention opened the farm gates to the wholesale production and use of fertilizer, and humans adopted the practice of releasing waste into the environment. To complicate matters, the increased use of fossil fuels which, when burned, convert to another form of reactive nitrogen, have contributed to the degradation of Earth's ecosystems and biodiversity, according to Maier and Henry.  The examples of environmental degradation from overabundant reactive nitrogen are several: red tide, acid rain, destruction of the ozone layer, smog, global warming, various sources of pollution and odors emitted from manure in animal feedlots.  "All of those criticisms have some kernel of truth to them, but they are overstated," said Phillips. "We [the fertilizer industry] are tinkering with the nitrogen cycle and the nitrogen cycle is not a leak-proof system, thus this has contributed to environmental degradation."  Phillips notes that technological advances are allowing farmers to apply the minimum amount of fertilizer required to feed their crops. The new products are helping stem the tide of excess reactive nitrogen in the environment, he says.  Other technologies that reduce manmade reactive nitrogen in the biosphere include solar and wind energy to replace the fossil fuels, Maier and Henry note. Natural fertilizers are making a comeback in agriculture, and eco-friendly sewage treatment plants that recycle all solid waste are now in place in Italy.  "We ... not only changed the size and shape of the food web, we also are impacting the elements in such a manner that we may not need our nuclear weapons to alter this earth's biosphere," Maier and Henry warn.  Copyright 2000, Environmental News Network, All Rights Reserved

Scientist says fertilizer may explain Gulf of Mexico problems (Environmental News Network, Wednesday, January 12, 2000, By Nelson Antosh, Houston Chronicle) Farmers in the Mississippi River Basin are facing the prospect of a 20 percent federally mandated cutback in the use of nitrogen fertilizer on their crops because of its role in creating a so-called environmental "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico.  The problem, technically called hypoxia, occurs only on the relatively shallow continental shelf and creates an area covering thousands of square miles of deprived oxygen, which kills some organisms and drives others away.  Following up on a rider attached to a bill in 1998, the president and governors are scheduled to develop a plan and submit it to Congress this year. States would be required to implement the rules by 2003.  These could then be a template for every watershed in the United States, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation.  However, a scientist speaking Tuesday at the organization's convention here questioned whether farmers' fertilizer is really the cause.  The proposed regulations are based on research that failed to look at other causes of the nutrient overload off the Louisiana coast, said Derek Winstanley, chief of the Illinois State Water Survey.  Even the assumption that the problem is man-made could be flawed, he said.  "We do not have good science on the table," Winstanley said.  There is the question of the Atchafalaya River pouring its nutrient load into the middle of the dead zone, he said. This is a big flow of water coming off the Mississippi that probably would have diverted the entire river by now if it weren't for the Corps of Engineers.  The Illinois scientist wonders about the possible upwelling of nutrients from the nearby deep waters. It should have been investigated but wasn't, he said.  Another possibility is the continuing loss of millions of acres of wetlands off the Louisiana coast.  "What happens to all those nutrients? That was not even addressed," Winstanley said.  The size of the dead zone, which usually occurs during the last 90 days of spring, varies greatly from year to year. In 1988, when there was a drought, it didn't occur at all, he said, and it was huge last year when there was a wet spring.  Nitrogen being released naturally from soils can contribute nearly as much to the Mississippi River as fertilizer, according to Winstanley.  This means that 100 years ago the nitrogen loads were probably greater than today, even with fertilizer, because virgin soils were so naturally rich. Nitrogen levels in the Illinois River are the same now as they were in 1960 despite the fact that farmers are using 10 times as much fertilizer, he said.  Copyright 2000, Houston Chronicle Knight Ridder/Tribune, All Rights Reserved

Court confirms citizens, rights to sue over pollution. (The Nando Times, 12Jan00, By LAURIE ASSEO)  WASHINGTON (January 12, 2000 12:24 p.m. EST http://www.nandotimes.com) - The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld citizen groups' right to sue alleged polluters under the Clean Water Act even though any financial damages awarded would be paid to the federal government.   The ruling also said polluters sued by private citizens under federal environmental laws cannot necessarily avoid paying damages by stopping their misconduct while the case is ongoing.   The 7-2 decision gave environmental groups a new chance to collect damages from a South Carolina hazardous waste plant for violations of limits on wastewater discharge.   "Congress has found that civil penalties in the Clean Water Act cases do more than promote immediate compliance ... they also deter future violations," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the court.   "A defendant's voluntary cessation of allegedly unlawful conduct ordinarily does not suffice to moot a case," Ginsburg added. A case might be declared moot if it were clear that the unlawful conduct could not reasonably be expected to reoccur, she said.   The case was a test of the Clean Water Act's provision letting private citizens file lawsuits to help enforce the law. Under the law, citizens can seek court orders requiring an end to misconduct, plus financial penalties to be paid to the federal government.   Brian Dunkiel of Friends of the Earth said after Wednesday's ruling, "This case had the potential to severely limit a citizen's ability to enforce the Clean Water Act. ... We are pleased that the court has maintained the status quo" on enforcement of the law.   Friends of the Earth was one of several environmental groups that sued Laidlaw Environmental Services in 1992 over its operation of a hazardous waste incinerator in Roebuck, S.C., that discharged wastewater into the North Tyger River. The facility was closed in 1998.   By the time a federal judge ruled on the lawsuit in 1997, Laidlaw was found to have come into compliance with the Clean Water Act. The judge ruled that the environmental groups were not entitled to a court order designed to deter future violations, but imposed a $405,800 in civil penalties for past violations.   The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the penalty in 1998 and declared the case moot. The court said that once the judge decided not to ban future violations, the only remaining remedy - a civil penalty - would not benefit the environmental groups because it would be paid to the federal government.   On Wednesday, the Supreme Court said the civil penalty was intended to deter future misconduct, and therefore it could benefit the environmental groups.   The justices ordered the case returned to a lower court to determine whether Laidlaw could show that the case was moot because future violations could not be expected to occur.   Ginsburg's opinion was joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter and Stephen G. Breyer.   Justices Antonia Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented. Writing for the two, Scalia said the ruling "violates traditional principles of federal standing - thereby permitting law enforcement to be placed in the hands of private individuals."   The case is Friends of the Earth vs. Laidlaw Environmental Services, 98-822. Copyright © 2000 Nando Media  Copyright © 2000 Associated Press 

For information - Email to: ellenr@nitrate.com or Call Toll Free 1-888-NITRATE (1-888-648-7283)

Last Modified: March 28, 2007   Website Map     Copyright © 1995-2006; 2007 The Nitrate Elimination Co., Inc.; All Rights Reserved